That's the guy right there. Awesome barrel. I had considered the Wilson one, but I've cut corners on barrels before and wasn't happy, so I had to go with the Shilen. That's not to say Wilson aren't nice, but the barrel I replaced with this was a Wilson, and I wasn't completely happy with it. That's just my experience, though. It also wasn't an SPR barrel.

That's one freakin sweet, and expensive barrel haha.

The Wilson SPR looks good from a price standpoint, but I really want this thing to be a good shooter.

So you originally got an 18" Wilson barrel (middy) but it wasn't a SPR profile rifle length and ended up changing it?

I swapped to a Shilen SPR barrel and had them change the hand guard from a 12" to a 14" to cover the rifle length gas system.

I'm pretty certain you would be fine with the Wilson, but I wanted one AR15 that I would never want to "upgrade" again... like a completely finished, with everything top of the line stuff. Considering the rifle complete cost me somewhere north of $4,000 I figured what difference would $100 make?

The Wilson SPR looks good from a price standpoint, but I really want this thing to be a good shooter.

So you originally got an 18" Wilson barrel (middy) but it wasn't a SPR profile rifle length and ended up changing it?

How did the Wilson shoot?

It was actually a 16" midlength/medium contour. It was pretty accurate. More accurate than your typical chrome lined barrel. I liked it, but it heated up and started getting inconsistent after a very short time at the range. I'll still use it on another rifle when I gather the parts.

The barrel on that upper you linked to is just the midlength version of the same barrel I bought. I'm sure it'll quite a shooter whatever gas length you end up with.

Seems like the upper and BCG are "match grade"... do you feel there was an improvement in performance using this or building off the SPR barrel would be a better idea?

Deuces and HK: I know this isn't the best idea considering what these barrel/uppers are capable of, but have you tried shooting XM193? Any improvement from a standard upper, or shooting anything but match ammo would be a bad idea?

Have you tried it, for plinking purposes, was the accuracy better than a standard run of the mill stainless upper?

I ask because I have a 24" 1:8 Stainless bull barrel upper which is my current target setup, and contrary to what everyone says about XM193, its groups very well at 100 yards. About 1-1.25 MOA consistently (10 shop groups). Sometimes better if I do my part and wind isn't wild that day.

I don't know if that's attributed to the load or my barrel, but I have come accustomed to XM193 shooting well. For days I'm hitting steel at 400-500 yards, I don't see the need to use match ammo using that rifle. Its just heavy, and I wanted an SPR to have something a bit more mobile. I hope I can see the same results, if I can, I would consider selling my existing 24" BB setup.

I haven't bothered trying it with the new barrel, but it shot well enough from my old 1:8 barrel, and shockingly well through the LMT 1:7 carbine I have. But match ammo is match ammo for a reason, and if I remember correctly, I think I've read that MK262 was designed for use in the SPR rifle, but also improves the performance of the M16 and M4.

Kind of goes against the idea of getting the match barrel to begin with.

I agree with you, but the question was more out of curiosity.

I will be ordering some match ammo, along with some MK262 77gr Sierra Match king to play around with.

Since the 77gr SMK was really intended to be used with the 1:7 twist, I'm trying to figure out if the 1:8 is really the right decision. Which bullet weights are you guys using with the 1:8? Have you tried the 77gr round with good results?

Coming in late on this but just finally got my Noveske 18' SPR / switchblock setup. Topped it off with a Valdada 2.5-10x42 mil/mil 2nd gen MP8 reticle. I love the feel of this rifle it is sooooo light !

The rifle was dinging the little 220 yard 3" swingers without fail, and the 12" plates at 625 are child's play for this barrel and match reloads. Very, very, very happy camper . I shot some groups at 220 as well but got tired of waiting for a cease fire to measure and left. Will give it another go next friday.

A bit of topic but maybe not. I wanted to know what your SPR likes to shoot. Been busy with school that ever since I got my Noveske 3 weeks ago and I just wanted to get a lead on what are the most popular rounds being used. I know the MK262 mod1 are popular but how about the Mod0, 75 Amax and others.

A bit of topic but maybe not. I wanted to know what your SPR likes to shoot. Been busy with school that ever since I got my Noveske 3 weeks ago and I just wanted to get a lead on what are the most popular rounds being used. I know the MK262 mod1 are popular but how about the Mod0, 75 Amax and others.

Mine loves 68 grain Hornady Match in Winchester 5.56 NT brass at 2.260" and...I forget the amount of H335 I was using. Too lazy to go in the garage and look at my book...

Anyone think a Vortex Viper PST 4-16x50 FFP is too much scope in terms of physical size and magnification for an SPR?

Depends on the application, and also personal preference. I used to run a 4-14X44 FFP scope which was pretty heavy at around 27 ounces. Combined with a heavy PRS stock, the entire package was quite heavy at about 12 pounds. It made for very stable long range shooting with lightning fast follow up shots. At 200 yards that gun would keep everything within a 10" circle as fast as you could pull the trigger (Out of state with 30 round mag even). It was also quite a bit heavier than I wanted, and kind of a pain to carry for any length of time.

I have since replaced the scope with a Leatherwood 1-4X CMR which is about 10 ounces lighter. I also replaced the PRS stock with a lighter weight MAGS EFX-A1 stock. Overall weight is down to just over 10 pounds. The weight and balance of the rifle now seem a lot better, and the lower powered CMR scope is still very capable at longer ranges (out to 700 yards anyway). I do occasionally miss the extra magnification, but overall I like the rifle much more now than when it was set up with the bigger scope. It's much more versatile now, which I think is more in keeping with the original intent of the SPR design.

Am I the only one who likes my scopes mounted low? I find a more stable cheekweld and sight picture when i have to smash my face (exaggerating) into the stock.

You're not the only one. The only reasons IMO/IME to mount a scope way up in the stratosphere like some people on here have done are: 1. Because the scope has a ginormous objective bell that wouldn't otherwise clear the rifle. 2. Because you have some kind of weird personal preference to the contrary.

Mounting lower to the bore is not just more comfortable; it is demonstrably better for precision shooting in general. Height-over-bore should be as low as you can stand it.

You're not the only one. The only reasons IMO/IME to mount a scope way up in the stratosphere like some people on here have done are: 1. Because the scope has a ginormous objective bell that wouldn't otherwise clear the rifle. 2. Because you have some kind of weird personal preference to the contrary.

Mounting lower to the bore is not just more comfortable; it is demonstrably better for precision shooting in general. Height-over-bore should be as low as you can stand it.

I can't even fit BUIS under mine, but I also never intend to remove the scope. 1.25" from the rail to the center of the scope. Have 45 degree KAC BUIS on it, I like them.